Nov 29 2006

The new rules of Google

Danny Wall recently wrote a quite large PDF on the new rules of Google which can be found here:

In this article Danny states that Google is going to change the relevance and importance of a link based on its traffic, not the SE traffic but the non-referral traffic. Traffic from email lists, and other online sites. Now Dan is a very proud man who states these points as facts but are they true facts? And if so what will this mean for the world of SEO and of course Google? Will Google die or will it grow even larger using such a method?

First of all there is something you should understand. He is very proud of himself. I think he thinks a little to highly of himself for his own good but that is another story. You should also make sure you do not mix him up with another seo ‘Danny Sullivan’. They are infact two different people in case you didn’t know that.

Unlike Aaron Wall or randfish you cannot always take Danny Walls articles as solid fact. Most of what Aaron or randfish says comes from research they have done while Dannys posts are based on what could be. It is alot like biased scientists who will say things that they have no proof for. I think he is probably a great guy you just should be careful of how you use his advice.

Now that I said that you are probably thinking I am going to trash Dannys idea of a new Google regime. Because of course such an idea is ridiculously silly isn’t it? Or is it? Could Danny be hitting on a very major plan that Google has been working on and which could uproot the world of SEO as we know it?

First of all I should probably explain all this nonsense I am going on about. In Dannys article he wrote:

First of all, inbound links are going to be calculated MUCH differently. Instead of simply counting the
number of links and the relative “strength” of the link for determining page relevance … Google’s going
to count the number of links and the relative “strength” of the links.

Which as he pointed out didn’t make any sense at first glance. And he goes on:

You see, Google is going to count a link’s “strength” by the unique frequency the link gets clicked
through. This is a HUGE change from the wy they used to do it. Thus a link from a current PR3 site
that gets heavily clicked through will be worth more than a link from a PR9 site that never gets
touched. This is a MASSIVE departure from the way most SEO pros think when coming up with a
linking strategy.

If this idea is correct it means that a link from a site recieving 5,000 hits a day will bring more value(considering other factors are somewhat equal) than a site that has only 500. Now I can hear you saying. “There goes the little guy. Now the big companies will dominate the search world.”

I don’t think so. Google has always been interested in giving the small businesses the same chances the big guys have and in many searches you can see this. Yes implementing such a feature would probably discredit those mass-directory, links pages, forum sig and blog comments links to nothing but that is great. At least I think so. This means that you will now instead of using PR(I never used it but some do) many will switch over to the Alexa rank to determine whether a site is good for link building on. Of course in many ways Alexa rank is inaccurate but it is better than PR right?
Now I know I am going against a a big majority of ‘SEO’ when I say this but I don’t think Danny Wall is very far off. In saying this I am going against teh opinions of some SEO I think very highly of. Has my respect for them changed? Not at all. We all can be influenced by different things and have seen many vastly different things in the seo world and to me this seems very logical. Now to change the whole algorithm over to this traffic analysis factor would be foolishness. But to factor it in now I think that is a good idea. Please read further to see my total viewpoint on this
When will this be implemented? I seem to recall Danny stating early 2007. Now that seems like a made-up date to me but who really knows. If google is designing this algo change they could bring it out at anytime. This could mean 2007, 2008 or maybe later or maybe never. They could be planning it but never actually bring it out for certain reasons. I think there is a chance it could come out in late 2007 but I am not one to set dates and times for things like this. And as I have advised webmasters over and over before not to chase after updates I still recommend that. Just be prepared in the event of such a change to switch your saddles so you don’t get knocked down. Be prepared not obsessed.

Also don’t think Danny was the one to come up with this idea. There was a leak from Google(very small leak over a yr ago) about such a operation. This was never confirmed as a real leak however and I have heard nothing else since until Dannys article. I had believed it then because I could see how it would work and believe it now. Not because Danny said it but because I had this idea before.

Danny also says:

Google’s also going to monitor where the clickthrough comes from … and display results accordingly.
So if you’re getting a lot of clickthroughs from India then you may be number 1 for searches occurring
in India yet buried DEEP in searches occurring here in the U.S.

Seems reasonable. I think they already do this with links instead of traffic. Where if 90% of your links are from US based sites you will get US based rankings. Using traffic is also a interesting way however there are some India sites who get tons of US traffic and US sites that get foreign traffic so not sure about this. I personaly don’t have a need for foreign traffic(indian, chinese etc) or anyone who doesn’t speak english as most of my sites as of yet don’t have language interpretation services so my site would be useless to them. Would Google realize this by noting they leave the site right away or not? Who knows. Maybe this isn’t even part of a update they are planning. We will just have to wait and see.
Danny notes:

Possibly the biggest change will come from Google looking at “not referred” traffic as part of the mix.
In other words, Google is going to start looking at people who simply type in your URL into their
browser as an indication of the “strength” of your site (and therefore its relevance for the key phrases
for your site). Another example of “not referred” traffic as far as Google will be concerned is traffic
that originates from a link you click out of your local email client.

In a case such as this TV, radio, billboard and other forms of non-internet advertising would effect your rankings still. What about those companies who can’t afford this type of advertising? What about those companies that can. Will all this traffic have that much effect on their site rankings? Will it push those little guys down? Looking at it from this angel it could appear so.

I believe if such a factor is developed into the google algo it will have to have only a small effect on rankings because drastic effects could be manipulated by heavy out-side-of-the-net advertising by large companies. Or maybe I am missing something?

One other thing that Danny said got my attention. This one I totally disagree on.

In this case, traditional SEO has NO IDEA what to do or how to do it other than “supplying good
content to visitors.” To say there’s a better way than that is like saying taking a jet across the Atlantic
is a little faster than taking a row boat.

If Google ever gets away from the ‘supplying good content to visitors’ factor were all doomed. I will then have to stick my foot on my mouth and go over to MSN because Google would then be trash. Content is king, always has been and always will be. Nothing will change that. Using visitors as a small factor in a algo is far different than using them as a sole denominator in determining a sites future. I don’t think Google is this stupid.

Danny also makes a comment which almost insinuates SEO such as Aaron and randfish will be nobodies when this happens however anyone reading this wonderful article and following HIS tips will become the next pro. Very big words considering he doesn’t have half the reputation either of these guys has.

As I said a few paragraphs back I don’t believe in update-chasers. Like tornadoes they are quite unpredictable and chasing them can have nasty effects on your site. Be ready for them but don’t chase them. You will learn nothing chasing them around. Remember Google is never going to get rid of the quality backlinks factor or the quality content factor. Following these methods is a sure-fire way to get rankings and keep them even if such a factor as traffic analysis is implemented by Google.

Just a small warning about these type of seo. SEO like Danny Wall like to make predictions which may or may not come true. If they do then it makes them look really good and if not people will forget after a while. Be careful when reading articles from SEO such as this. Compare them to SeoBook, seomoz and what works on your site. If they make a prediction keep it in mind but don’t go making drastic changes to your site based on one guys opinion.

Copyright © 2006, 1st-rankings Co.
This article may NOT be redistributed in any way, shape or form. If you would like to link to the article we would appreciate it.

Post to Twitter


4 Comments on this post


  1. Mark Ellison said:

    nicely done. i found it funny that a fairly regular user at seo chat never even heard of the guy. you cant EVEN go to seo chat without seeing one of his usually good articles.

    November 29th, 2006 at 9:20 pm
  2. visio said:

    Thank you!
    You must keep in mind that there are many who use seochat as a forum only and do not read the articles and many who read only the articles and never goto the forums so there is a way they might not know.

    He has good ideas at times just alot of times they are un-based and very arrogantly written. From his articles you would think he was the only true seo in the world which i have a real problem with anybody who says that.

    November 29th, 2006 at 9:59 pm
  3. T-bone said:

    Wow, to be honest i’d never heard of the guy and i doubt know ones heard of me but it does seem like a crazy thing to produce. I’m not saying this will not happen but based on no real evidence, its abit ludacris to say such things.

    but no doubt about it – this would ruin my day lol

    December 6th, 2006 at 12:58 am
  4. Joel said:

    Danny Wall spoke to my company and encouraged us to use his “services”. After we sent him the money he “needed to help us dominate Google” for our key words and terms, he split. I refered him to another customer because he talked so well. Danny Wall took his money too, and now they are suing him.

    In hindsight, I should have seen it coming. He never showed us a company that had succeeded with his “tools” for “dominatiing” Google, but we believed him anyway.

    In my opinion, he is a crook. Flat out crook. He took my money, and a friends money, and stopped responding to us. If anyone else has had a problem with Danny Wall, I encourage you to call us as we have information that may help you recover your money.

    Good luck All.

    July 27th, 2007 at 1:45 am


Subscribe Form

Subscribe to Blog

Our Partners

Readers Pick

Clicky Web Analytics